Alan Babu vs The Telecom Regulatory Authority ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11706 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1945
                       WP(C) NO. 34557 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          ALAN BABU, AGED 25 YEARS, PROPRIETOR,
          ROYAL MOBILES, 12/268, OLLUR (PO), THRISSUR DT,
          KERALA STATE, S/O, BABU, POOVATHINGAL HOUSE,
          OLLUR PO, THRISSUR DT., PIN - 680306.

          BY ADVS.
          T.K.AJITH KUMAR
          HARITHA HARIDAS


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
          MAHANAGAR DOORSANCHAR BHAVAN,
          JAWAHARLAL NEHRU MARG, NEW DELHI.
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 110002.

    2     TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
          REGIONAL OFFICE, BANGALORE, GROUND FLOOR,
          TELEPHONE HOUSE NO.1, RAJBHAVAN ROAD,
          BEHIND GENERAL POST OFFICE (GPO),
          BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
          REPRESENTED BY ITS ADVISOR, PIN - 560001.

    3     THE MANAGER, BHARTI AIRTEL LTD,
          S.I. AVENUE, KUNDANNUR JUNCTION,
          ERNAKULAM, KOCHI., PIN - 682304.

    4     THE MANAGER, VODAFONE IDEA LTD,
          V.J.TOWER, VYTTILA PO, ERNAKULAM,
          KOCHI., PIN - 682019.

    5     THE MANAGER, NOKIA SOLUTIONS AND NETWORKS,
          286F+RGJ, CHEMBUMUKKU PO, KOCHI,
          KERALA., PIN - 682021.

    6     THE MANAGER, OPPO ELECTRONICS KERALA PVT LTD
          NO.67/6446, BANERJI ROAD,
          NEAR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682018.
 WP(C) NO. 34557 OF 2023
                                   -2-

    7          THE MANAGER, LAVA MOBILES,
               CORPORATE OFFICE, A-56, SECTOR-64,
               NOIDA - UTTAR PRADESH., PIN - 201301.

    8          THE MANAGER, HAIJIN TRADE INDIA PVT. LTD
               VIVO TOWER, DOOR NO. 67/2581-B1&C,
               PRESIDENCY ROAD, OPP: VIDYANIKETHAN COLLEGE,
               KACHERIPPADI, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682018.

    9          THE MANAGER, RELIANCE JIO INFOCOMM
               1ST FLOOR, GLOBAL ARCANT, OPP: CENTRAL BAZAR,
               PARAVATTANI, THRISSUR DT., PIN - 680005.

            BY ADVS.MANU S. DSG OF INDIA
            Gopikrishnan Nambiar M
            RIA ELIZABETH JOSEPH
            G.HARIKUMAR (GOPINATHAN NAIR)
            K.JOHN MATHAI(K/413/1984)
            JOSON MANAVALAN(J-526)
            KURYAN THOMAS(K/131/2003)
            PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM(MAH/58/2006)
            RAJA KANNAN(K/356/2008)
            JAI MOHAN(D/2454/2009)
            AKHIL SURESH(K/000576/2016)
            SRI.SUVIN R.MENON, CGC

        THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION       ON   16.11.2023,   THE   COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 34557 OF 2023
                                   -3-

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner alleges that respondents 3 to

9 are "unlawfully stopping services by them to

him" (sic). He says that he has, therefore,

preferred Ext.P8 'representation' before the 1st

respondent - Telecom Regulatory Authority of

India (TRAI); and seeks that it be directed to

be taken up and disposed of, within a time frame

to be fixed by this Court.

2. Sri.Suvin R.Menon - learned Central

Government Counsel, in response to the afore

submissions of Sri.T.K.Ajith Kumar - made on

behalf of the petitioner, submitted that

petitioner appears to have approached this Court

on a misdirected impression regarding the manner

in which the 'TRAI' functions. He explained that

said Authority is guided by various Statues,

Rules and Regulations; and that petitioner will

have to make a proper complaint before it, if he WP(C) NO. 34557 OF 2023

requires any further relief. He submitted that a

representation in the nature of Ext.P8 can never

be considered by respondents 1 and 2; and hence

that a writ of mandamus cannot be sought by the

petitioner to be issued.

3. I find great force in the afore

submissions of Sri.Suvin R.Menon because, if the

petitioner has a valid cause, he can certainly

impel it before the 1st respondent appropriately

and in terms of the applicable Rules and

Regulations.

With the afore liberty being reserved to the

petitioner, I close this writ petition without

any further orders.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv WP(C) NO. 34557 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34557/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 3.7.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.8.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.8.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 9TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT-P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6.10.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.